On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:21:40 +0200, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek at gmail.com>
wrote:
> My suggestion is that once you have a revised PEP that includes some
> proof of concept
> code with less overlapping with PEP 390 (they are different proposals
> obviously),
> you post it here for a round of feedback, then I'll push it in the
> PEPs for further processing
Thank you kindly Tarek.
I'll look into seeing how I can try to reduce overlap if you think
that it's an issue.
The problem for me is that under windows it's considered not good
programming practice to build logic implicitly into section
headers within a configuration file.
So things like:
[metadata:python_version == '2.4' or python_version == '2.5']
requires = bar
Doesn't look at all good to me. It looks like code in a configuration
file. I'm really against it. But hey - I'm biased.
So for me, the overlap is not strong. Because I see my alternative
as a more technically correct way to approach using configuration
files.
The sample code you provided on the other hand is very nice. Perphaps
when you see my code you'll be as horrified at my code as I am at
your configuration files. :-)
David